It simply depends on your computer and video card. I can run that setting at 4 with no noticeable difference.
LL's quest to remain mired in circa 1999 graphics is admirable and noble and all but is costing SL/LL a vast amount of money. When mesh is rolled out and the inevitable "use all available resources" happens then I dare say SL will look a lot better but will probably lose the lower end anyway as they get tired and drop out because they can't have a decent experience and they choose alcohol, tobacco, reefer, and pizza over a decent gaming rig. As is said at Microsoft: Upgrade or die" This too shall happen with SL if SL is to survive a long time. If LL doesn't do it then someone else will. As for defaults yes the ultra default should be 4. LL recently changed the gpu_table.txt settings and any card that defults to ultra can more than handle RenderVolumeLODFactor at 4 with no noticeable impact. My GT240 on Kirstens with full shadows tweaked for realism gets a great frame rate with RenderVolumeLODFactor at 4. With shadows off and RenderVolumeLODFactor at 4 I get better than 29.97 FPS which is cinematic quality. However I get tired of ARC pundits spreading lies. Especially the ones saying mesh is low ARC since currently a theoretical mesh with 64 ktris/fr (64,000 polys per frame) will register less than 20 ARC depending on the settings and scripts involved. It is, after all, one damned prim to ARC. Oh, and BTW, the "ARC" will have to be changed to show mesh render cost and leave out the script cost. Make a script cost measure and a real ktris/fr worst case cost estimate measure for the avatar. And then we need parcel/region render cost metrics available as well. And an estimated bytes downloaded measure for people on capped bandwidth plans. The entire concept of impact metrics needs to be revisited and done right IMHO. ________________________________ From: leliel <leliel.mir...@gmail.com> To: opensource-dev <opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com> Sent: Sun, October 3, 2010 2:54:36 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Question about LOD debug setting On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Ponzu <lee.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > I picked up a notecard that says to increase RenderVolumeLODFactor to 4. Is > this reasonable, do you think? And if so, why not increase the default a > bit (currently seems to be 1.125 It is reasonable, the default setting is a bit low. It varies with your graphics settings tho, 0 for low, 1.125 for mid & high, and 2 for ultra IIRC. I find 3 a good compromise between quality and performance. > Unlike increasing your draw distance, this will NOT create lag for yourself This however, is blatantly false. If rendering everything at full detail all the time didn't cause a drop in frame rate than why would we even bother with LOD? _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges